budget amendment with members back in session at 9:00 eastern. in about 45 minutes, we will focus on the work of the joint deficit reduction committee with democratic rep peter welch of vermont and rep trey gowdy. ♪ ♪ host: the house in at 9:00 a.m. today. a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. it's reportedly the first vote on that issue since 1985. a similar proposal passed with the then new republican majority. the house and senate passed a bill that keeps the government operating until december 16 yesterday. in new york, washington, d.c., and other cities, protesters

associated with the occupied wall street movement at the two- month anniversary. if you are a democrat, calle -- you can also send us an e-mail. can send us a tweet. again, the occupy protest at two months. we want to get your assessment. the editorials of the papers, particularly those in the tabloids are this way this morning. "the new york post" calling in "loud, but lame."

the editorial of "the daily news this morning called it "99% point list." in "the washington post this morning -- i and "the washington post" this morning. here is some of what he had to say. "the discussion is destabilizing because it does not represent traditional alignment."

"how people feel about fairness, the 1% at the top versus the other 99% has nothing to do with how they feel about banning assault weapons or abortion." host: with those things in mind, we will breed more as the

morning goes on. with the occupy protests at two months, we want to get your sense of them. to get a sense of what happened in new york yesterday, a reporter with the cable news outlet there. he is on the show to talk about it. tell us a little bit about what happened in the financial district and the subway system. give us a sense of what happened. guest: from the protesters' perspective, it depends on where you were. in downtown early in the morning, there were a lot more clashes with police, it seemed. it was a rowdy bunch of protesters, as well. as the day wore on, there were different routes, depending on

which protest you attended. the first one i've loved to personally was in union square -- a first one i went to personally was union square and that was primarily students and grant students at nyu and suni and the new school, as well as laborers, union workers, and that was primarily peaceful prayer what i saw between police and protesters. students wanted lower tuition. a wanted amnesty for student debt. there were also efforts to unionize that they felt were blocked among grass students. -- amond grad students. that spot was chosen at union square because of the subway system. they tried to occupy 16 subways. an organizer told me, unlike

occupy wall street and the stock exchange earlier in the day, the occupation of the subways was not intended to disrupt. that was really to gain strength in going to different locations. i did not see any disruption on the subways. there was just rallying. foley square, that's where there were more issues, especially in the streets. a large portion -- in union square, they marched in closed down fifth avenue. interesting for me was, over the course of six years we have been -- over the course of six weeks we have been covering occupy wall street, every time the protesters tried to take to the streets, is cat and mouse game with police. occupy wall street protesters generally refuse to get permits

for their marches because they believe it's not the way to go about protesting -- asking permission, essentially, from the authority they are protesting. this time, a bidder was not as much of an effort to keep the protesters out of the streets. perhaps it was an effort to have less conflict by the police department. i do not know. it seemed to be less conflict as a result of that. host: for the weeks to have been covering this thing -- we have been looking at the activity. has there been a type of unified mission coming out of what's been going on in new york' as far as what folks who are part of this movement -- the message they want to send out. guest: certainly. when i started covering this, there were all these messages, everything to ban hydrocrackifrg

-- they all find a route in what protesters see as corporate greed and the disparity of wealth and the influence of corporations on politicians that they see as bought and paid for and the system being unfair. they feel all of those issues go back to those root causes. host: was there any response from those who actually work on wall street that you talked to yesterday? guest: i did not speak to many people -- i was not covering the wall street portion yesterday. i was the afternoon-evening shift. i got text messages from friends who work on wall street and their impression was -- it's crazy down here. many of them agree with the

fundamental message that the system is unfair. even some of them who benefit from the system feel that, you know, that it is skewed. in all fairness, i have other friends who disagree entirely and are opposed to the protests and believe people should work. i would say they stereotype the protesters and call them lazy. i think that's unfair, as well. but there are a variety of different types of protesters down there. >> after two months, is there still the strength that you saw when you first cover this event? is it sustainable through the colder weeks and into next year? guest: well, it has certainly gained strength. covering this a month and a half

ago, zuccotti park, where the occupied for two days shy of two months it turned out, the sleeping bags through every single week. there were more and more of them and less and less room to walk around. it certainly grew in strength. if yesterday's any indication of what will happen moving forward, i would say it could be sustainable. course, i do not know. perhaps as a result of mayor's clearing out of the zuccotti park, the numbers we saw yesterday and the different types of protests that were staged a far exceeded what i generally have seen until that point. it might be because the clearing out of zuccotti park instigated more of a response from people who are dissatisfied with the

status quo. host: that is michael herzenberg joining us on the phone. thank you for your time. your calls on the occupy protests. greg on the line for republicans, you are up first. good morning. caller: it's a pointless situation. these people do not have a plan. they ought to be protesting at the white house, where we lost half of $1 billion from solyndra. people should look at that. host: the protests nationwide are ineffective? caller: yes, they are. george soros supports this kind of thing. host: russell on the line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. i could not disagree more. i'm with occupy pittsburgh.

this is something that just started. we are going to occupy everything. we're going to occupy halliburton. we are going to occupy city halls. this is the republicans worst nightmare. host: to what goal? caller: people say there are no goals, but if you look the website at occupy pittsburgh, we have a statement. host: can you summarize it? caller: basically, the 1% is getting away with murder. it is sucking the lifeblood out of the country and the people can feel it. we've had enough. we are going to stop this. host: what do you think your actions will do in pittsburgh? what do you want to see happen as a result of what you are doing? caller: we are throwing a monkey

wrench in the system and we are getting a lot of support. what is violence is the policies and the police. the police that want to protect the 1%. this thing about the 1% in earning their money -- they did not earn their money. stocks is a game. it's a gambling game. i'm a socialist. i do not believe in stocks. in a few years, i think the word socialism will be as bad as liberal was 10 years ago. host: alicia on the line for democrats. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. when it comes to occupy wall street, i am in support of it. as an american, everyone has their role to play in the system, whether you are rich, middle class, or a poor american. for example, rich people have a

role to play when it comes to taxes. if they are going to do charitable donations, and do not just have that as a tax write off. i am for capitalism. you are playing the tax game. if everybody could have those loopholes, everyone would want to not pay their pay share. some of them are getting the money back while they're still sending jobs overseas. when it comes to the middle class, you have to have -- you have to live within your means. you may have a combined income, husband and wife, or a gay marriage, of $1,000. it's about buying what you can afford. host: what do these protests do

to advance those goals? caller: i forgot the guy's name that you had on there. i think the protesters need to be a little bit more organized. it's throwing a wrench in their plan. i am part of the 99%. i go out and i vote. protests are great. i think there goal should be to vote as well. everybody let their voices be heard -- if you do not vote, you cannot complain. i voted to be times, and the primary, and the caucus, and the general. i let my voice be heard. thank you very much. host: on twitter -- wasilla, alaska, kathy on the line for republicans. caller: yes, my teenage

grandchildren ask me -- why should we go to college to better ourselves, to get ahead, when all they want to do is redistribute the wealth. they just want to have a goal in life, called, and dreams. that's all i really have to say. host: what do you tell them? caller: i tell them i do not agree with this form of protests. i do agree with protests. this one does not seem to be organized enough. it seems to just want to go after the rich. i do not know what to tell them. i wish i had an answer. host: a couple of the stories, while we are talking about the occupy protests at two months. "the washington post" -- here is the headline. "economy steadily picking up steam."

"also, inflation. the federal reserve left with more flexibility to take action if the economy worsens." host: providence, rhode island. peter on the line for democrats. we are talking about the occupy

protests at two months. caller: good morning. it's a movement that that the very beginning. like all movements, over time, they will grow. they will continue to make their voices heard. they will be a single message come out of everything. at some time, there will be some action. the united states is totally flawed. host: to make unsustainable, and to the protests as we see them now have to continue? caller: they will continue. they will have ebbs and flows because of the weather, of course. this will grow and grow and there will be changes. i take it back to the civil rights movements and all the other movements that took place in this country. now.he words we're hearing at the end of the day, the

message was received and change had taken place. host: if the movement goes forward and the message goes forward, how does that unified a message? caller: it's a work in progress. at some point, there will be formation of a head, if you will, and that will take place. host: off of twitter -- columbia, maryland. thank you for joining us. luke on the line for republicans. caller: yes. my biggest thing, the whole occupy movement sounds like they are a bunch of 5-year-olds trying to yell until their voice is heard. i think it is misplaced passion.

i do not blame them for feeling passion about something. at the same time, if we had the entire occupy movement working in political offices and taking advantage of a legislative process that already in place and has been in place since the birth of our nation, i think something would be getting done. it is really just a shame. it's kind of embarrassing, to be honest. i have followed the occupy movement probably more than anyone. i'm on occupy wall street way too much. host: what draws your interest? caller: to be honest, i'm a patriot. i am an american first and foremost. i follow it because it is kind of embarrassing. it embarrasses me to see these people think that there's such a

thing as a free lunch. it's interesting to me that they think they can go out and protest and something will be done. that's not true. you do not just go out and cry for help and something is done for you. you need to go out and be the change that you want to see. that is one of the quotes the use, but they are not being the change. they're not finding a solution. they are not part of the solution. host: our show goes until 9:00 today. the house comes in to take up business. until then, for the next 20 minutes, we'll talk about the occupy wall street movement at two months. the lines are on your screen. st. louis, missouri on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i am listening to a lot of the criticisms of occupy wall street and hearing a lot of

people clinging to some of the oversimplified concepts that are really part of the problem of the corrupt and dysfunctional system. i heard one people say that you have to vote. look at who the republicans are offering in this round of voting. congratulations on the band of cartoon clowns they are offering to the american public as people who can solve problems. one woman said her grandchildren are talking about -- the point of going to college if they are just going to redistribute the wealth? when you got a system that increases and fosters the development and retention of wealth by the 1%, it's going to

be hard for them -- it's going to be pretty much impossible for them to get any kind of upward mobility unless they've already come from something. we have kids living with their grandparents and parents right now because they cannot make it on their own. it's not because they are not working. because the system is screwed up. this was before the 2008 collapse. then you have these people talking about -- well, all these occupiers are lazy or unemployed. have you gone out there and open your ears and your-to some of the people who are out there? do you honestly think that all the people out there -- people are fed up with a system.

people are getting millions of dollars -- host: we will have to leave it there. a couple stories about newt gingrich this morning. this is "the atlanta journal constitution." at 24%, topping a list following mr. romney at 22%. the anchorage response to his consulting work -- mr. newt gingrich's response to his consulting work. by some accounts, he earned $1.8 million.

host: the papers also have store is looking at the connections between his consulting work and the kinds of companies he consulted. this is "the new york times" this morning.

host: other stories regarding those of year, as well. dover, wisconsin. cindy. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm pretty much out of patience with the occupy wall street groups. in milwaukee, they took over a bridge during rush hour traffic, people trying to get to their homes after working all day or

trying to get to their jobs. it seems like many of these people do not have a concept of -- i'm not happy with things, but i still have to follow the laws. they go to the parks and they take them over. they do not abide by the regulations. they take the use of the park's away from everyone else who would like to enjoy them. they do not seem to get it. they lay down a bunch of -- lay down like a bunch of children throwing a tantrum. i know they are not brutalized right away. they just will not go. host: the atlanta, georgia. democrats line. caller: i am one of the people who support occupy atlanta. i am one of those people who have been calling in this show for the last four months before

this thing started. had waken up and saw what happened to our country after we have this crash of wall street. for two years, is seen like no one was aware of what had happened. we start seeing these documentaries showing these criminals locked into the republican party criminal -- walking into the republican party and allow them to go into the banking system and robbed this country. the federal treasury pays off the con jobs they have done in the fannie mae and freddie mac debacle. they were getting away with robbing the country. host: with all of that in mind,

what have the occupy protests done? caller: the occupy people are demanding that these people be thrown out of the government. these people in our congress have been running this country. they have paid politicians off through lobbyists. newt gingrich is one of these type of politicians who have made a career of lying to the american public and telling them what they want to hear and not what they need to know. host: how would you say the occupy protests are changing that? caller: they are showing the american people. they want to get back to where we used to be where we had a strong middle class, where people were able to get

somewhere to have a stable income and plan a future for their children. host: this is from twitter. about 10 more minutes on this. michigan, michael on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call, c- span. i've been watching this movement since the beginning. i was happy to see the mayor do what he did. like any good movement, all you have to do is flush the toilet. host: easton, connecticut. peggy on the line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call. surprising to me is that it has taken this long. how much longer are the american people going to sit down and take all this? we see the corruption daily on wall street.

now we see that our politicians are involved in this. they can be involved in insider trading. it's quite disgusting. we see the trading on wall street is 70% done by computers and algorithms now. a book the other day dealing the -- the other day the telling the mess in greece. one of the houses in new york city was instrumental in that. those young people need a future. they have their university degrees and they are ready to go. this is the only outlet they have at the moment. up against washington, we know you have an uphill battle. my hats are off to them. i hope it continues to grow. by its growth alone, it's bringing to the forefront that people are not willing to take

this anymore. it's not just the young people. doctors, nurses, lawyers -- everyone is down there. good luck to them. this is what people do at the end of the world. for the man who said he was in paris about this -- guess what? this is the way this country was started. thank you. i do support them. thank you. host: on twitter, a viewer adds -- in "the wall street journal" there's a wall street of thomas hoenig. the headline of the story says he is poised to be the next head of the fdic. it goes on to say that he was --a "mr. mcconnell took flak for his

financial ties to wall street." host: rochester, new york. chris on the line for democrats, go ahead. caller: some of the protesters had pro-canvas signs. there are over 100 million regular users.

they are representing a variety of ventures that are never heard. there's a conspiracy of silence. cannabis has been proven to be not only a mild narcotics -- the medicinal cannabis is often put down. we have now come to know that it can treat many conditions, which the current medical system does not treat. host: john on the line for republicans. caller: i live in new york city. i see these protesters every day. i pass by them. i am sick and tired of them. i think to many of them watched the movie "fight club." there's no overriding message. i spoke to a couple of them in zuccotti park.

they have some different things they're concerned about. the biggest thing is, no one is preventing them from going out and getting a job. i think most of them are unemployed by choice. cindy from georgia, i was listening to her. look at all the scandals that have been going on in the last couple of years. it's all democrats. mf global was headed by jon corzine. countrywide. solyndra. i understand the anger, but let's directed to the right people. they should be in washington. it's enough already. especially in manhattan, it every day. look at the media reaction versus the tea party. there have been thousands arrested. 15 murders.

rapes. the tea party, there's one little sign they do not like and the media has an uproar. host: "the washington times" with a story about energy secretary steven chu testifying on solyndra. you can see this on our web site, c-span.org and then accessing our video library. herman cain asking for secret service protection. "usa today" writes that the homeland security secretary authorized protection for mr. cain today produce the first of the eight major gop candidates to receive secret service protection. he was in new hampshire yesterday. he was criticizing reporters as

he was talking about focusing on his pause, as it was known, on libya. he's also talking about -- here are some of his thoughts on foreign policy from yesterday. >> you know, that powerful pause that when by on the internet -- they spend more time focusing on when i am not talking than when the other candidates are talking. that's a compliment. you do not need the details -- do you really believe that? >> yes. who knows every detail of every country of every situation on the planet? nobody. a leader is supposed to make sure we work on the right problems. host: governor rick perry in the paper, as well, in "usa today."

"perry is again slashing away verbally." host: also, the census figures have come out. this is also from "usa today." the number of people living to age 90 and above has tripled and is likely to quadruple by 2050. it puts extra pressure on

elderly health programs, retirement savings, and baby boomers. phoenix, arizona. independent line, good morning. go ahead. caller: overall, i support the occupy wall street movement. there are so many different messages. so many different people are saying so many different things. the basic concept that the financial system is hurting the government -- we need to figure out a way to get away from that, told a reform. you have republicans and democrats saying -- the american people, besides the 1%, are taking the hit. host: doc on the line for

republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. the name of these people really fits them, occupiers. they remind me of the occupiers and eastern europe after world war ii. a bunch of bolsheviks. most people do not know what the bolsheviks are. they need to look that up and how they feel about the business. these people run around the streets with communist flags. of course, you do not see that on the news. a friend of mine lives in oakland and set me pictures. hundreds of communist flags. you do not see that on the news. can you tell me why? one sign in ae

tea party rally and the news is fixated on it. they let murders, rapes, dedication in the streets, -- host: louisville, ky. caller: i love the idea of occupy wall street. i hope it grows to be something that will change this country. host: if you have to boil down the idea of the protests, how would you boil that down? how would you summarize the idea of the protests? caller: make the country better. i hope to see getting rid of some of the politicians. i'm from kentucky. i hope to see that they occupy

mitch mcconnell out of the senate. i want to see things better for this country, better for people just like me that don't have anything. the rich people have everything. we have nothing. host: "the new york times" this morning writing that the california supreme court ruled thursday -- prop 8 --

host: one more call on this. it is from new york. andrew, independent line. caller: the occupy wall street movement was maybe a good idea in the beginning. now it's time to go home. they made their point. they are sitting around drinking bottled water, eating mcdonald's. they should boycott some stuff instead of sitting around and doing nothing. they should start with a clean sweep on all the company'ies. next time a company starts laying off people, we stop buying their products. that's how we freemarket works. host: that's the last call we will have on this topic. the first guest is representative peter welch of vermont. before that, we will talk about

our "contenders" program. tonight, hehubert humphrey. he ran for president in 1968 and he lost. we will look at his influence on our c-span series, the contenders. you can find out more about the series by going to our web site , c-span.org. peter welch is up next. before we go to that, we want to take you to yesterday. the hearing we spoke about with steven chu. the topic was solyndra, which got a government loan and later declared bankruptcy. here's a little bit of the exchange for mr yesterday. >> would you approve that loan?

>> knowing what i know now, we would say no. you fast forward two years in the future -- i wish i could do that. >> how closely were you involved in the loan process there? >> i have to approve all the loans. i have to be briefed on all the loans. i ask questions about the loans as they come up. >> condoleezza rice, and george mcgovern, randall kennedy, and jim leher. live this weekend on c-span2. you can also look online at booktv.org. pat buchanan and ralph nader. >> we are not immune in this

country from these forces. when the melting pot has been thrown out and you are preaching the multi-cultural some, was told -- what is holding us together? >> find the complete schedule online. "washington journal" continues. host: the capitol is where our next guest joins us. he is representative peter welch, democrat of vermont. can you give us a sense if you ever from leadership or other places about where the super committee is? guest: basically, no where. there's not a lot of optimism. most of the members of congress are outside looking in.

the hope that a lot of us have, over 150 of us, we got together and sent a letter to the super committee encouraging them to go big and goebbels. a lot of us think we would be more successful if we tried to4 hit totrillion -- if we try to hit $4 trillion and put everything on the table. from everything we've seen, it's the same that you see. the divisions between the two sides are too great on revenues and spending cuts. there's not a lot of optimism among members of congress. host: have both sides come halfway in your estimation? guest: i do not think so. looking from the outside, i think we would be much better off if we had a bigger plan.

the scope of the problem is significant. we need a long-term realignment. there are things we could do if there was an acknowledgement that we have to have revenues. there's an ideological conviction upon many members of congress that you cannot have revenues and that would be bad. the democrats, obviously, have to be willing to make concessions on spending programs. there are things we could do that would strengthen medicare but save taxpayers money. description trucks and medicare, if we did it the same way we did in the v.a., we would save $160 billion in 10 years. a really good idea about fraud. if we assigned an assistant u.s. attorney in every district in the country to crack down solely on medicare fraud. that's over $200 billion that you could save in medicare.

i think these ideas make a lot of sense. the democrats would be going into territory where they generally do not fit it would require the republicans -- and not. it would require the republicans to agree to revenue. i agree with the congressman from idaho. we do have to put revenues on the table. there's not a lot of optimism on the basis of what we see. host: what happens if sequestered takes place? guest: sequester, theoretically, would have half the cuts from the pentagon and half the cuts from the rest of the budget. it does not actually going to effect until 2013. this may be the lion that did

not roar. congress would have a whole year, 2012. there's a presidential election coming up. obviously, the likelihood is that there be a lot of effort to try to change that, avert it, modify it, or whatever. i do not know how much weight the idea of sequester will have. host: "the wall street journal" shows that as the lead editorial. they also make this point that i want you to respond to. "sooner or later, democrats must face the reality." guest: entitlement spending has to be addressed. i do not think we should be looking at social security as a way to solve the budget deficit. anything we do on social

security should be intended to make the program secure and sustainable. we all remember the bipartisan approach that president reagan and then speaker tip for o'neal had. where we have a real challenge, the cost of health care. in our country, we are spending the most, even as we get the least. if you have health care spending in the general health care programs -- medicare -- and in the general economy going up two times the rate -- that is not sustainable. that's why the things we do in health care would help the general economy, not just health care. price negotiation and prescription drugs, cracking down on fraud, and also try to change the payment system to much more of a performance-based approach.

we have got to implement reforms on our health care system to bring the cost down. instantly -- incidently, in most places where that's happened, it has improved quality. host: this tweet -- guest: bowles-simpson is a much more credible plan that anything considered by super committee now. there's a lot of things many would argue with. we've got to do things to make the entitled a system -- the ryan budget approach was to slash benefits and payments to providers. the approach bowles-simpson is taking, i think, makes a lot of sense.

they take a sensible, comprehensible approach. host: our guest is with us until 8:20. if you want to ask him questions, the lines to do so -- you can e-mail and tweet us, as well. arkansas, you are up with the representative peter welch. go ahead. caller: government is being driven by nonprofits. i have a hard time understanding how organizations that are strictly partisan can raise -- can received a non tax status and become political action committees and they donate and yet they pay no taxes. grover norquist draws a salary. he's selling an idea. he's a business. here we are competing with people who are not even paying

any taxes in their corporations. they're going to close post offices, but yet they can mail something at 11 cents. i have one envelope i took to the post office and it took 64 cents to mail. they are going to allow these people to continue putting out their ideologies at the cost of us. -- of us paying 44 cents for our stamps. host: the outside influence of congress. guest: he is right. to some extent, those people with a special tax status -- in addition to the point that the caller made, there is just, as we know, this explosion of money in politics that's really toxic. i think the supreme court made one of the worst decisions in the history of our country in

citizens united. it is just disgraceful that a corporation is allowed to spend shareholder money engaging in political activity and against the first amendment protection that were meant to go for citizens, you and me. i don't care if you are on the left or the right. corporate, special-interest money is really dominating the congressional debate where decisions have to be made about the people of this country. you're going to get a skewed approach. it's really going to be a problem. host: chesapeake, virginia. good morning to paul on the line for republicans. caller: i would like to know two things. one, the difference between the debt and the deficit, which a lot of people do not understand. secondly, when does the president and the senate intend to present a budget and not a continuing resolution for the

united states? thank you. guest: thank you. good questions. the debt is what we have accumulated since the beginning of this country and what this country owes for the difference between the revenue we took in and the revenue we spend. the debt right now in the country is in the range of $15 trillion. the annualt is thes difference. you are right. the congress is in such gridlock. it has been so dysfunctional that the basic function that this congress has to pass a budget that tells our agencies, our programs, how much money they will have in one year to spend to do the work they are assigned to do -- there is such a vision that we are unable to pass the budget. the republicans, who are now majority in the house, had a field day criticizing the democrats when we were the

majority. republicans are finding the same problems getting a budget passed. it's emblematic of the division we have in this country is quite dangerous for the long-term well-being of this country. host: "the washington post" has a story about the bill that passed the house and senate yesterday. here is what they summarized. guest: well, there is some truth to that. there are some areas where there's less contention than others. also, disaster relief assistance. it has been historically been the case -- the biggest natural disaster we've had since 1927, the hurricane to hit vermont. states hit hard -- katrina in

the gulf coast, states along the mississippi river when it floods -- congress has always come forward to provide disaster assistance. we got in and credible fight on how to -- got in an incredible fight on how to balance the money, even as the rivers were rising. i was quite delighted that we finally got the disaster relief past. there's a good part here. that was bipartisan. i am a democrat from vermont and i was thankful to mr. b oehner and mr. canter. here is the emblematic thing, too. i think it's really an opportunity for congress if we identify those areas where there is significant agreement. there's enormous dispute about

taxes and spending. we know that. on highways, infrastructure, and education, there are a lot of areas we can agree. if we can focus on them and build some trust across party lines, we might be able to make some agreements. host: speak about today's work on the balanced budget amendment. guest: i am against the balanced budget amendment, even as i am for balancing the budget. i see it essentially as something that an alternative to doing the real work. in vermont, we do not have a balanced budget amendment. it's the only state that does not have one, yet we always balance our budget. we've had a tradition of republicans and democrats understanding that you've got to pay your bills. i was one of the sponsors of the pay as you go legislation that was part of congress from 2007 to 2010. that was really effective. anyone of us who have a proposal

that was going to cost money, whether it was to spend more money on a program you supported, or tax cuts we thought adventitious, we had to come up with a way to pay for it. that is where you have to take the responsibility. the new congress, the republicans a policy that. what would abolish a pay-as-you- go piece of legislation when that has been working? that explodes the debt. the rhine budget would have the deficit going from $15 trillion to $23 trillion. the spending program is not in balance. host: our guest is peter welch from vermont.

representative trey gowdy will be joining us in about 20 minutes. spokane, washington, democrat line, go ahead. caller: back when nixon was the president, 1960. when reagan get in, he tripled the national debt. up until now, the democrats have been responsible for $1.6 trillion. george bush as is possible for $10.1 trillion. $15 trillion -- guest: i think he has the numbers pretty right.

how did you get here? ironically, i think the rhetoric in this town is accusing the democrats. there is plenty of responsibility all around. the big driving factor were the war in iraq, the war in afghanistan, both of them on the credit card. that is astonishing. we asked men and women to go to war, why don't we pay for it? that is irresponsible. then we had the bush tax cuts. they were not paid for. there was a political maneuver to get the medicare program passed without paying for it. all those things are heading up. the economy was having such a

mill town with the financial crisis on wall street'. there were some very specific policies. the two wars were unpaid for. the medicare program was not pay for. those were actions that president bush promoted and congress supported and left us with this huge deficit. host: the headline from "the washington post" talks about the tax proposals as far as revenue from representative toomy put forth. what do you think about the recommendations from him? proposing somerep revenue. he is trying to make permanent the bush tax cuts.

revenue that is much less than it should be as part of solving this problem. it guarantees the bush tax cuts will be forever in place. that makes no sense. a responsible legislative body is like a responsible house hall. you have to make decisions based on the circumstances. you save money when your kids are younger so you can send them to college. in good times, you save money and increase spending. you have to adjust to the circumstances. this approach has the gall of imposing his view that the bush tax cuts should be permanent. i think that is a bad proposal. illinois.cago, caller: it has been kind of

surprising to me the last couple of years. i'm a recovering republican. i've become an independent. there is one thing i've learned in manufacturing all my life. when a thing doesn't work, you leave it alone. you let it go. the republican way has not worked. we have had 12 years of the consequences as the republican way of taxing and helping big business and pushing back on anything that has to do with helping america. we have invaded people. we have killed lots and lots of people all over the world. we cannot give a decent health care to americans. you pay your premium on your insurance, but to cannot afford to pay your copays.

the only race that you get is just what the company needs you to start paying extra on your insurance. it is a net loss when you figure in the inflation every year, even if it is very slight. guest: i think he is right. real wages are declining. they say the recession has ended. most people experience of that -- the question that. wages have gone down nearly 7%. during the recession, they went down 3.2%. a lot of the reason the wages are going down, take home pay is close to health care has gone up. the copays, the deductibles. it is a tough situation for

working families. this is where the income distribution in this country is back to where was in the 1920's. i think everybody knows that fundamentally when the economy is working, it means the middle class is expanding and strengthening. the heart of america is that we've had this broad base participation in it. we have that people working and the wages have been going up as productivity is going up. it feels most of the gains in productivity are to create more profit and going to the top one% 1% or 2%. host: we have a comment from twitter. guest: i would have prescription drug price negotiation just like we have in the va.

the medicare program is the biggest purchaser of drugs. we pay retail price. one not have the largest purchaser that buys cosell negotiate to get a wholesale price -- that buys a wholesale. there's no excuse for us not to do that. host: it is to tom on the florida line -- good morning to tom. caller: you often hear people say congress does not work anymore. i truly believe the thing that is making congress not work anymore is the party line vote. how foolish do you think the american voter is when a vote go strictly by party-line and not a single republican and not a

single democrat votes one way or the other? you hear about majority whip pressuring congressmen, changed their vote against what they truly believe their vote should be. i wish that this process would stop and the constitution would work the way our founding fathers intended to work. these congressmen should be free. do not, they are free -- do not tell me they are free. somehow make it so that our congress works again. it doesn't work now. congress doesn't work now. everything is baspend. everything is pressure. guest: i have to lars agree with

what the caller said. many votes are pretty much party-line votes. on contentious issues like the budget battle we're having or the health care bill, or climate thenge legislation, american people think that it is just a function of pressure and they don't have confidence in the decision. so i do believe it is essential that we have a process that allows for there to be a bipartisan votes and debate. if we have that, the american people -- that is the only thing that will get to these contentious issues like the budget. we probably got more right than wrong and give the american

people some insurance that we will make it right. a lot of my colleagues worked in state legislature where there always was bipartisan votes. i was in the state senate in vermont. i was able to appoint members to the committees. there is a tradition in vermont to a point the minority party to chair committees. we had the republicans chairing committees. some people said i was a good guy. it had nothing to do with that. it was important they have a seat at the table. at the end of the day, it was a product of honest deliberation in an open process. i would like to see congress moved for the direction the caller was suggesting.

host: we ask bernie sanders about the go big approach that you advocated and others as well. listen to what he had to say. guest: that agreement chopped cut for working people and said that we would establish a super committee to look at 8 $1.2 trillion. the rich people have been asked to pay more in taxes -- not one penny. the largest corporations have not been asked to pay more than one penny. all the cuts have come from working families and the middle class. i don't have a crystal ball. i worry that the burden will be placed on working family, the elderly in terms of cuts and

social security. i am opposed to that. host: what about his wonders? guest: i share those worries. the way to avert the burden of being on the middle class is to have revenues be a major part of any solution we will propose. we have to have revenues to be part of this. when we talk about medicare, there are things we can do it that we should do that will make the program stronger, even as it saves people money. we buy wholesale and pay wholesale rather than pay retail and save $160 billion. i'm fighting a very hard to make revenues a big part of this and to make reforms in entitlements, ones that sure programs, make them sustainable for future generations. host: our guests, representative

peter welch, democrat from vermont. caller: my question was -- i have been watching the debates on the new balance the budget deal. why is it always an issue to cut the va benefits whenever the debt reaches what it is and can reach a decision? guest: it shouldn't be. i think you're right. social security should not be seen as a piggy bank to pay for the wars, all the things in the general fund's budget. we all pay into social security. we should make sure and that program is here for the people who are on it and about to go on to social security. host: when congress comes back,

what will happen as far as getting a resolution to go past the current cr? guest: it will be contentious. the continuing resolution last december, the debt ceiling debacle in august were the premise of that debate was that it was optional whether we pay our bills. that was irresponsible here. now we will be coming up to another cr. it is rattling the markets people's confidence in the institution. a major reason that congress is held in such disregard by most of the american people. this is not a good way to do business. host: san antonio, texas. caller: why do they always want to touch social security knowing they have raided the social security fund for billions of

dollars? there are other things they can do to bring down the deficit. there are other things they can do concerning medicare. people getting things they do not need for medicare. they should put an end to that. a supreme court ruling allowing corporations to inject money. that's a problem we're having with a congress that does not work. until we get the money out and the supreme court ruling favoring one party, that is not right. the supreme court should be ashamed of themselves for the ruling they made. guest: i cannot add anything to that. with you.gree the supreme court has made, in my view, some bad decisions.

this notion that a corporation is a person makes no sense. they are trying to equate these corporations with billions of dollars in assets, that they -- to see that you and i are equal to them, when obviously we are not. the supreme court will be taking up the health-care bill. i am apprehensive because i think that law should not be struck down. we'll have to wait-and-see. that would change id quite significantly. the basic question in this country -- if we are going to have health care that is available to every citizen, then

all was how to help pay for it. it should not be a free ride. the supreme court is taking a look at medicaid. the states all of the medicaid program with a contribution from the federal government. there is some question as to whether or not the supreme court is going to challenge in its ruling the whole medicaid structure, which is essential to getting low income people access to health care. that makes me quite apprehensive as well. host: troy from massachusetts. caller: good morning. i would like six numbers. what was the spending the last year bush was in office? always the unemployment rate -- what was the unemployment rate?

spending for the current fiscal year? what is the projected unemployment for this year? guest: i didn't come prepared with all those numbers. you may have them. host: what is the overall point of knowing the numbers? caller: to expose what the in differences between the spending and the amount that income is and what the effectiveness of it is. guest: i still don't quite know what the point is. during the bush years, we went into a structural -- when bill clinton was the president, we were on track when he left -- he had four years of balanced budget increase its 20 million jobs. we have the clinton tax rates, 20 million jobs created, four

years where we balance the budget. we were on track to eliminate the deficit. during the bush years, we have the two tax cuts, we have the two wars. we have the lower bush tax rates. he exploded the deficit. the performers between mr. bush and mr. clinton economically and physically -- one got an a and one got an f. caller: thank you. this is a privilege. i do not know why the surplus when bush took over, instead of giving it back to the wealthy, why did they put it towards the medicare problem? what your thoughts on what i saw

on tv were the millionaires confronted the committee today saying they want their taxes raised? host: we will leave it there. guest: there are a lot of people in this country who've done extremely well, who have benefited by the wonderful economy that is possible for them to have. they understand that if all the wealth is going to the top one%, pretty soon the 99% will not be able to purchase the products that they are making. they want to share the responsibility to ensure the burden. the wealthy individuals are saying, raise our taxes, understand that this isn't just about them being generous. this is about having an economy that works for everybody. there will be successful if the 99% also shares in the success of this country. that's a good thing that some

of our successful people in the country are promoting. host: representative peter welch is a democrat from vermont. thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you. host: that was from capitol hill. a few moments, trey gowdy will join us until 9:00 a.m. the house comes in at 9:00 a.m. to take up the balanced budget amendment. we'll take calls until the time that gowdy is ready to go. the phone numbers are on your screen. 202-737-0001 for democrats. 202-737-0002 for republicans. caller: hi.

host: hi. caller: i wanted to get a response from the representative. i guess a republican will do just as good. i want to know is when they are going to stop making promises they cannot keep. there's no way that the government can continue to work unless something is done about medicare and social security. everybody says, will not go to touch that -- we are not going to touch that. it is kind of funny to me. i was 50 years old when -- i was 15 years old when lbj came up with the intel the programs. -- came up with the in taliban

programs. -- entitlement programs. it will bankrupt the government. caller: the house of representatives -- host: linda, you're on the air. caller: good morning. first-time caller. nothing is going to get done in congress unless they start running a more like a business. the need to be in washington doing their jobs. they are rolling thei -- they are only their about 1/3 of the time. new rules are to be in session -- if a ceo showed up expecting to get anything done, they would not.

a key word is "continuity." "the consistent existence of operation of something over a point of time and the state of civility and the absence of disruption." they have all the time. they are not there long enough to do their jobs. so the former super committees. host: joining us now from capitol hill is representative trey gowdy. he is from south carolina and served the fourth district. well, and good morning -- welcome and dgood morning. a mesa think the average this time around will be different -- what makes you think this time there will be different? guest: i think that we had had a series of surpluses, if my

memory serves me in the mid 1990's. i'm not optimistic that it will pass. when you cannot exercise self restraint on your own behalf, you need to limit your own freedom. yesterday i drew an analogy to odysseus' leaving troy and having his men tied him up as they pass the sirens. rarely do you want to cede your own freedom and life. six times in the last 50 years we have had a balanced budget. you can do better just by guessing than six out of 50. i'm not optimistic that it will pass today. host: what is the point of the exercise if you're not optimistic? guest: we have elections.

voters need to know like on any other vote whether elected leader stands. when you hear rhetoric like a balanced approach, it falls necessarily i would think that what is better than a balanced approach would be a balanced budget. it held all those accountable who say one thing and perhaps do the other. anytime you put a yes or no buy your name is good. i stand to be surprised this afternoon. we will pick up democrat votes. in this town, that makes it bipartisan. we will lose republican votes on the balanced budget amendment. their work to its proposals. this is the less draconian of the two. and we cannot even get this passed. i think it rings hollow when you talk about fiscal sanity and you

will not even agree to spend less than you bring in. it makes it home when you go back call to tell your constituents that you are serious about fiscal restraint. host: if we can get a thought on the super committee work. i want to read something from the papers today. guest: well, i have yet to meet a person who voted for the debt deal that is happy with their vote. i have yet to meet a person who voted against the regrets it. i voted against it. i think it is emblematic of what congress likes to do, passing

not a responsibility to the next congress or a super committee. i am a big fan of civility and public discourse. oftentimes that is confused with compromise. we have elections for a reason. voters are going to weigh in on whether or not they prefer to have your mix of cuts or whether they prefer a heavier mix of revenue enhancements. i have not met a republican who is not willing to have tax reform. the best way to raise revenue is to get more of our fellow citizens working. no one contends that revenues are down. they are down because we're in a recession. we could raise the marginal rates to 50% and we will deal with just 1/5 of today's deficit.

the notion we can tax our way out of this -- we will have to have cuts. you have to have a debate about the size and scope of the government. that is why we have elections. host: does your state get affected it sequestration takes place? guest: a little bit. i don't think sequestration will take place. it is not need to think that if you just say we're targeting medicare providers and recipients that the recipients are not also to feel the pain. i did nothing that triggers are going to be triggered. i think we'll have some fancy accounting or will have a small target that gets us through maybe the next six months or to the next election cycle.

i would not want to be on the super committee. there was no danger of me being on that in the first place. i'm not optimistic it will reach the so-called grand bargain. host: our guest is with us until 9:00. richard is on our republican line. caller: how much would it help our country if 95% of the stuff it if we sold in our stores today was made in america it is that of china and vietnam and all these other places? nobody seems to have on that -- nobody seems to hit on that. we don't make anything in this country. we told them 25 years ago that this would happen. now it is happening and that we

have to cut this think that that. guest: that is a great question. i come from a region in the country where we have a significant textile presence for generations. we still make some things in south carolina. we make tires and automobiles. your point is well taken. for my judgment, it is a combination of our tax policy, our regulatory apparatus, our liberation structure -- our litigation structure. i voted against one of the three trade agreements if you weeks ago. when i go on tours of plants back home, it is the uncertainty and the regulatory apparatus that makes it difficult for us to compete. take china for instance. we respect intellectual

property. we have a bill will be don't a a lot as soon as i leave here dealing with the nlrb. just chose to come to south carolina. ing isxt time bowe considering a new line of work, it will be between washington state and india or brazil. we have to be much smarter about our tax structure, our trade agreements, and our litigation structure. host: what would your bill do for the national relations labor board? guest: this would reverse one of the rules nlrb has promulgated. elections take place within 31 days. they want elections between 10 to 14 days.

that the stock of the employer enough time to prepare -- that does not give the employer enough time to prepare. some of the union's that are endorsing presidential candidates for a race that is a year off. they understand the need to prepare for elections. they want to give employers 14 days. the chairman has a workforce democracy in fairness act. you have posters requiring that these posters be posted in all places of employment. it is important to note -- they say the workers need to know what their rights are. the only rights they tell about are the right to collectively bargain. i have seen those posters.

you have the posting of posters. i think it creates an alarm if you're a business trying to decide whether to come to the united states are go to another tontry, you're going to have wonder whether the environment is conducive to growth and job creation here nowadays. host: 20 on the independent line -- tony on the independent line. caller: they keep talking about social security. all you have to do with the rich people is simple. take things that they can deduct and stop that. that will solve the problem. the main question, did you see

c-span on sunday? they say they can do this stuff -- they have brokers to take care of that. do they think people are stupid? if i did inside trading, i would be gone to jail. thank you. guest: thank you for your service to our country. i was a prosecutor for 16 years. i have zero tolerance for breaking the law. i made a living putting people in jail. i sent a question to the judiciary staff for asking, is the problem one of enforcement or is it one of legal vehicle? i asked specifically about the insider-trading issue that the colleges brought up. 60 minutes" takes theut

position that we don't have the legal vehicle. i will find the answer to that. host: how would you summarize legal vehicles? guest: i'm not convinced the existing law doesn't cover congress. that is not a vehicle issue. that is a lack of enforcement. it still needs to be fixed. if someone is not enforcing the current law, that is where you need to direct your attention. you still love no enforcement. -- you still have no importa enforcement.

anything you sacrifice, you should not benefit from that. i will find the answer to the caller's question. he asked about social security. he is correct. social security trust is a myth. i have yet to add -- i ask workers who are 55 and below, would you work three more months if you knew that it would make the system solvent for your children and grandchildren? i have yet to have reached person say no -- i have yet to have a person say no. there are fiscal problems. they don't trust the people they send here or to any legislative body to do what they say they are going to do.

social security is not hard to fix. medicare is more of a challenge than social security. the caller is right. it was supposed to be a trust fund. host: california, richard, democratic line. caller: i appreciate everything this gentleman is saying. in california, when someone gets killed last night. citizens against police units. he got killed. that is what happens when you don't handle your business in congress. you put us down there on the ground. the day-to-day activities -- that is why occupy oakland it is

going on. you pick this -since-you pitch citizens-- this man lost his life because somebody rob a bank. he got killed. we have to deal is done here on the ground. this man killed last night -- this man got killed last night. guest: i do not know the facts of that. i think you can have a robust debate of ideas without pitting citizens against citizens. i don't know anything about the facts of what this caller was referring to. the loss of life is regrettable. i do not know the facts.

i don't know if the shooting was justified. we have to stop the class war for. i do not mind idea warfare. mr. welch, he and i do not vote very similarly. he walked a realistic and coupled -- he walked over to me yesterday and complimented me on something i did yesterday. most people do not see that. you can battle on ideas and still the responsible for the person. maybe the message needs to go out to our fellow citizens. a robust debate, not name- calling and not violence. we have a rich tradition of civil disobedience in this country. it doesn't have to be hand in hand with violence.

if you cannot express your view without breaking the law, you need to in larger vocabulary and be a better in argue your position. host: bob from carson city, nevada. caller: good morning. my name is bob. i have been a lifelong republican. i have a question about the closing of the whirlpool and maytag plants. the governor of michigan said she asked the world will people if they could locate -- gst whirlpool -- she asked the whirlpool peopple. -- people. an american worker is paid $10

to $12 an hour. is it true the republican party is getting paid off for jobs that are being of shored -- off- shored to china and mexico in corporations like john deere and caterpillar? host: mr. gowdy. guest: teacher the republican party is being paid off -- is it true at the republican party is being paid off? no. we have to elevate the discourse. this denigrates the debate a low bittle bit. labor costs are a small part of the consideration. it depends on which biz's you're referring to -- it depends on

what business you're referring to. regulatory, litigation, and the uncertainty of not knowing what comes next. is it going to be health care, cap and trade? uncertainty is the real enemy of job creation. congress has all other problems -- congress has a lot of problems. i don't think it's destructive -- constructive to the debate. i have manufacturers that make earth-moving equipment, manufacturers who make textiles, military apparel. tire manufacturers. michelin is in my district. bmw is in my district.

a worldwide textile little has pivoted more towards investment materials and chemical research. we have automotive research. the german let me share a subcommittee that has the additional columbia and also health care. politicians from time to time i get tired of the politics. i decided i was going to have a panel that included president obama supporters who up to the job creators. i invited one up from green ville who is an obama supporter. he explained how this particular -- the affordable care act will and his business -- will end his business.

i believe it was an unintended consequences of russia to a major landmark piece of legislation. are we going to require temporary staffing agencies to provide health insurance? what you'll one of doing is closing the temporary staffing agencies. they cannot provide health care for two wish for someone. we have to be more thoughtful. pieces of legislation will impact 100 $ of the population -- 100% of the population. the house comes in and about 50 minutes. caller: the reason why most of these companies are going over to china or india is because the labor rates are 25, 50 cents an hour, 1/10 of what you have to

pay the american worker in order to survive. because these companies to go to china. the products we get back are inferior to anything that was made by americans today. i'll take my answer offline. guest: bmw makes bmw in south carolina. if labor were the issue, it would go to china. michigan -- michelin makes tires in south carolina. we make lots of things in south carolina. you have not been with me when i've gone on plant tours. they say labor cost is a small part of their calculation. host: 4, good morning, skype --

florida, scott. caller: they were talking about shifting jobs to the young the states because it was a third- world nation, and no health care. i'm calling about the balance budgets. south carolina is low wages. we do not need a balanced budget amendment. we need people that have guts to go into congress. you said, i know this job. this job has 3 steps to it. you have not been able to produce your job yet. you've not sent one bill to the senate for financing that can pass the senate and get the

signature of the president. so you're not doing your job. we do not have a balanced budget because you folks do not do your job. when you spend, you may. you have the power to make laws, spend money, and make money. guest: we have passed 60- something bills that has gone to the graveyard of ideas. cap and trade to market a vote. we passed paul ryan's budget. orion was courageous enough to take on medicare reform and he was vilified for it. the notion that the gop house has not done anything is false. if you want us to only send bills to the senate that the senate will pass, that you need a democrat house.

we had a democrat house and a democrat senate and a democrat in the white house and things don't go swimmingly then either. we have sent appropriations bills that have not been voted on. the senate has not passed a budget in almost 900 days. it may be great politics to continue to blame the gop house. it happens to be incorrect. host: one thing from the manciple as the press conference was a debate over the tax cuts -- one thing from the nancy pelosi press conference. >> the goal of the republicans is to say that the speaker has said that the bush tax cuts must be extended.

cannot report of the plan. if the plan is to repeal the medicare guarantee for our seniors, that is not balanced and that is a place we cannot go. guest: sheer political demagoguery. that is why we have a 9% approval rate. paul ryan was vilified for having the courage to take on our lodlargest unfunded liability. the 111th congress extended the bush tax cuts. i would ask this. if we agree to let the tax cuts expire, which you then agree to cap spending at 18% or 92 cent of gdp?

would you tend to agree to a balanced budget amendment -- 18% or 19%. we are $1.5 trillion out of a this year alone. we're proven ourselves to be incapable of balancing the budget. if you connect in a mammoth the deals with alcohol and congressional sellers, we can have one that deals with fiscal sanity and balancing the budget. 49 states have thit. south carolina has sit. i had to let people that make $19,000 a year at be furloughed without pay.

i had to let prosecutors and sick, we have to furlough you -- i have to let prosecutors -- these may be career-ending decisions. i am ok with that. i'm not going to mislead the american people and say that we have a texting problem. what is a fair amount to tax the so-called rich? if 34% is not the right now, what about 50%? that is a fit of our deficit -- of ours that a fifth deficit. host:, texas mike, republican line. caller: i listened to the stock

for the past couple of months on solving of months-- i have listened to this talk. the answer is simple. if we open it oilfield back up, that is 500,000 jobs and chemical plants and steel mills, etc., etc. $50 a week of social security payment by the employee, $50 by the employer, that is $100. $50 million a week paid into social security. $50 million paid in on income- tax. we have oil wells capped off in the state of texas for 30 years. we borrow money from china to give to our enemies, the terrorists.

we have to open the oil field and we will put people to work. thank you very much. congress has been taking money out of the post office for 30 years. guest: the caller corrected linked together our job creation crisis with our energy crisis. i hate to sound like a broken record. we passed a dozen energy bills since i came here in january. i'm not aware of a single one that has been voted on by the senate. i would love for us to be more energy independence. when the permitting process is as arduous as it is right now, then we will continue to get our oil from canada and mexico and from countries that are not always friendly to us. i would love frost be more

energy dependent. but the pipeline from canada -- i would love for us to be more energy dependent. -- look at the pipeline from canada. we can pass a bill a week -- we have seen leaders on energy. we do not control the senate. host: 5 more minutes left. john on the independent line. caller: good morning. i did watch mr. ryan take his version of the health-care bill and he was virtually laughed at. i do see the republican party that the tail is wagging the dog. i see grover norquist who does

not believe an economic multipliers and signed no more taxes in your district. jim demint -- our system is built on getting together and coming up with decisions. when i see the republican party being held hostage by rush limbaugh and people like that, what we see -- debate is a good thing. jon huntsman makes perfect sense. a moderate. host: we're almost out of time. caller: on the deficit, we're not getting anywhere because the republican party -- they want democrats to give nine things for one thing and republicans because theydo it

are tied to grover norquist. guest: jim demint is my constituents. if the court thinks it is far right to spend less money than you bring in, we're going to have to agree to disagree. balanced inbudget 27 years. that was called draconian. that is the political and .armint we ira this caller likes jon huntsman. i respect that. he is likely not going to be the gop nominee. host: we assign grover norquist's pledge on taxes/ guest: i try not to sign pledges barring the candidacy --

during the candidacy. i have supported paul ryan's tax plan. that's a tax increase. i don't think i've met grover norquist. i have not met rush limbaugh. i want to do what i think is right consistent with the constitution. if the means i come back, great. host: how you see the next week playing at with the super committee and the deadline and as the debate matters of thec cr letter on this year? -- later on this year? guest: there is been discussion about the republicans'